Counselling your child against serious health risks of changing gender not ‘family violence’: BC court ruling
Lawyer John Carpay is President of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF.ca), which intervened in the BC Court of Appeal in the case of AB v. CD.
In the case of AB v. CD, the BC Court of Appeal has allowed a 15-year-old female-born minor to continue receiving puberty blockers and testosterone, which will likely lead to the irreversible destruction of the minor’s sexual function and fertility.
A lesbian event has been removed from Sydney, Australia’s LGBT Pride after a vocal minority protested the participation of a popular lesbian YouTuber with critical views towards transgender self-ID.
Arielle Scarcella runs an LGBT-centred YouTube channel with over 630,000 subscribers.
She has also spoken out against self-ID laws which have enabled biological males to be transferred to women’s prisons after the commission of serious offences, such as sexual assaults. In 2018, Scarcella collaborated on a video with Blaire White discussing how lesbian sexual preferences that do not include an attraction to biological males who transition to female were not “transphobic.”
Les-Talk was originally planned to be one of the events featured at Sydney Mardi Gras, the local Pride parade and festival. A panel-style discussion also featuring Tania Safi of Buzzfeed, the event began to draw ire from trans rights activists for including Scarcella. A petition was launched on February 15 demanding Scarcella be removed and replaced “preferably by someone of intersectionality.”
The petition was launched by Johnny Valkyrie, a transman and drag performer most notorious for a January incident at the Brisbane National Library. Valkyrie hosted Drag Storytime at the library, and was one of the two performers confronted by demonstrators from the University of Queensland National Liberal Club chanting “drag queens are not for kids.” The protestors were filmed and doxed.
The doxing resulted in one of the protestors, an openly gay student named Wilson Gavin, committing suicide the next day. Valkyrie used the opportunity at the library to raise funds for his “top surgery,” including a post on the day-of Gavin’s death—later updating the post to claim it was made prior to knowledge of his passing.
According to Valkyrie’s petition, Tania Safi of Buzzfeed has already dropped out of Les-Talk stating “I do not agree with Arielle’s transphobic and biphobic beliefs.”
10 Hours ago, Valkyrie uploaded an update to the petition, celebrating the “deplatforming” of Scarcella and Les-Talk.
Les-Talk was not officially cancelled, but was disassociated from Mardi Gras, according to a Facebook post made on the event’s official page. According to the post, the event is going forward being “privately held” by the “POC Queer women” organizing it.
Scarcella has not been disinvited from the event, and the event will proceed at another venue, separate from the LGBT Pride festivities.
Les-Talk’s Facebook page was littered with offers of support posted to the page’s wall by individuals outraged by Scarcella’s treatment.
Even multiple transpeople defended Scarcella’s beliefs, asserting she was not transphobic. One transwoman pleaded with the community to give Scarcella a “second chance,” while a transman praised Scarcella for “saying things no one else talks about.”
Scarcella is dismissive of the claims of transphobia, asserting she is anything but. “People have labeled me transphobic for being critical of trans ideas. I have no issues with being transgender. I’ve had more trans people in my videos than any other YouTuber to date,” she told The Post Millennial, noting that her only issue is with self-identification laws which might put women in danger.
“To those who truly believe I’m transphobic, I hope you change your hive-mind mentality and see how much you’re hurting your own community by acting so hateful.”
A sizeable sector of the Canadian sports bureaucracy has recently decided that it is acceptable to allow a biological male to compete against female athletes. Clearly inspired by Bill C16, it is an interpretation of this amendment to the Canadian Human Rights Act that requires scrutiny.
Take, for example, U SPORTS (Canadian Interuniversity Sport). They introduced a policy in 2018 making it permissible for anyone to compete in the category with which they “identify.” A person could be on the men’s team one semester, then self-declare as a “woman” and immediately compete on the women’s team the next semester without being expected to undergo any form of pharmaceutical or surgical intervention.
Those of us coaching every day at ground level are dumbfounded by this development and we strongly disagree. In no way can this be fair to female athletes!
Now, I have played and worked in the sports sector for over 40 years across the globe: in South America, North America, Europe, Africa, Asia and the Caribbean. As an athlete in track and field I won national championships, set national records, achieved NCAA “All American” accolades and proudly represented Canada on many national teams. As a leader, I have coached hundreds of athletes across the development spectrum—beginner to professional—in at least seventeen different sports and even assisted a pair of figure skaters to Olympic Gold (2002). And now I also represent some 3500 people, having been elected as president of the board at Athletics Alberta.
In all these years, after many a scandal, I have NEVER seen anything as preposterous as this “inclusion” doctrine.
Anecdotes accumulate across media platforms about male cyclists, weightlifters and track athletes establishing dominance on female podiums. More alarming, still, are the true stories about female bodies being crushed by impact with male contenders in the contact sports of handball, rugby and MMA fights.
Any policy forbidding us to make a distinction between the sexes is sure to impact athletes and competition officials, alike. Parents have already informed me that they will remove their daughters from sports if their girls are compelled to compete with males and/or share private spaces with them in locker rooms and hotel rooms. And if sports officials become worried about volunteering for fear of being labelled “hateful” in awkward situations where a participant’s identity must be resolved, we will have no ability to conduct competitions at all.
The situation as it applies to Canada seems ironic in the extreme. Even as we launch a national campaign to emphasize “safe sport,” this particular doctrine of “inclusion” is being promoted that will make female athletes more vulnerable than they have ever been in the history of sports!
Perhaps a better word might be “hypocrisy.” What other word could be used when we see the Government of Canada virtue-signaling about investing heavily in gender equity even as it privileges an ideology that threatens to push girls out of sports completely:
“In Budget 2018, the Government of Canada announced a target to achieve gender equity in sport at every level by 2035. This included an initial commitment of $30 million over three years to support data and research into innovative practices to promote women and girls’ participation in sport, and to support national sports organizations in promoting greater inclusion of women and girls in all facets of sport.”
For someone like me with an advanced degree in human biological sciences, the situation is perplexing, indeed. It has long been established that biological sex is permanent and that male athletes enjoy all the benefits their genetic category provides: bigger heart, larger lungs, stronger bones, larger body, greater muscle mass, more blood volume, greater size of tubes bringing air into the lungs, and an exaggerated level of aggressiveness, to list just a fraction of the vast array of physical advantages.
So, when I am coaching a young girl who has all the hopes and dreams of sporting success in her heart, what do I tell her? Am I supposed to lie? Am I supposed to pretend like she has any chance at making a team or a final when I look down the road at an ever-increasing number of male bodies who will be self-identifying into her category?
This situation begs so many more questions: How did we arrive at a point where Canadian sports leaders are formulating and promoting policies that completely ignore the existence of sexual dimorphism (physical differences between sexes)? Was a GBA undertaken? If so, was the impact on female athletes considered?
And what do we do now? How in the world do female athletes in Canada seek redress when everyone is afraid of running afoul of the law? Who is going to listen even if we can find a way to discuss this matter?
It is worthy of note that the very entity that was established to advocate on behalf of female athletes in Canada—the Canadian Association for the Advancement of Women in Sports (CAAWS)—is the one sending speakers to various sports association meetings across the country promoting 100% acceptance of “transwomen” athletes into female sports (presumably at the behest of those eager to promote an agenda using Bill C16). A quick check online reveals the following Position Statement:
“Consistent with existing human rights legislation and CAAWS’s ongoing commitment to achieving equity for girls and women, CAAWS supports the full participation of all individuals in sport and physical activity in the gender in which they identify.”
They claim this is an effort to promote “inclusion” and “safety” in sports. Common sense tells us that it does no such thing. It cannot be “inclusive,” when the very presence of the biological male athlete serves to exclude a female athlete from a lane in a final race or from a position on a team! It is not “safe” when the legislation offers no mechanism to screen for ill intent and when the resulting physical injuries are bound to happen in only one direction.
Since the intent of Bill C16 was to address “discrimination”, I cannot help but ask: Which entity is experiencing discrimination here? When “gender identity” and “gender expression” were added to the Human Rights Act, was “sex” removed? Is it possible that as sports bureaucrats in Canada spend so much time promoting the shiny new rule, they have forgotten that “discrimination on the basis of biological sex” is ALSO still a possibility? Because for me and so many of my colleagues, it seems clear that including a male person in female competition inevitably results in “discrimination on the basis of sex.”
As a person with mentorship status in Canadian sport, I do not recall having been consulted about this doctrine and its impact. When I ask female colleagues, young and old, if they were consulted, nobody has answered in the affirmative. It is fair to say that female athletes across Canada were not consulted.
Apparently, the one person who WAS consulted happens to be a medical doctor who specializes in the hormonal and surgical transitioning of children. He was the key expert on an ad hoc working group assembled by the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES) in 2012 to consider “trans inclusion” in sports. The document of recommendations (2016) resulting from this one working group is now being foisted upon sports associations across Canada as the unassailable authority on “gender inclusion.”
Take a moment to absorb the irony, once again. A bureaucratic entity (CCES) whose sole purpose is to advocate for NO CHEATING and NO HARM in Canadian sports now makes it a priority to convince the entire sports sector that biological males should be welcome to compete against female athletes with no questions asked. In what way is this ethical or appropriate?
Those of us who conduct sports at ground level have a duty to sound the alarm. Members of parliament MUST understand the crisis that is about to unfold due to this faulty, ill-advised legislation.
Surely, the demise of women’s sports was not the intent of Bill C16?
On the bright side, I believe there are ways that a compromise can be achieved. Looking to our friends across the pond in the UK, their version of Bill C16 has built-in exemptions in law to protect female persons in specific contexts, including in sports. At ground level in Canadian sports, it might even be possible to include a third category in some instances to accommodate self-ID athletes.
Whatever the case may be, it is impossible to arrive at a happy consensus if we are offered no safe forum to meet and speak on this topic. It is beyond time that we are permitted to have this conversation about “inclusion” in Canadian sports without fear of reprisal.
Graham Linehan took to Twitter to assist Stella O’Malley, psychotherapist, author, and advocate for children’s health in creating a list of gender-critical therapists.
For this, he was accused of advocating for conversion therapy.
But if there’s anything trans advocates should have learned from the recent revelations of young detransitioned people emerging on the other side of gender transition to find that the invasive surgeries and hormone treatments were a mistake, it’s that not every young person who outs themselves as trans should go through with transition.
Pink News called Linehan “king of the transphobes,” and on Twitter, predictably, trans advocates were calling for his removal from the platform.
Conversion therapy for homosexual teens has been roundly mocked over the years. It is inhumane to tell teens that their same-sex attraction is wrong and needs to be fixed. Additionally, it usually fails as a corrective, and everyone involved, from teens to parents would be better off accepting homosexuality than fighting it. That makes loads of sense.
But we don’t have large groups of young people who once believed they were gay entering their 20’s, realizing they weren’t, and finding their bodies and minds irrevocably altered, their reproductive organs butchered, and their lives destroyed. Why? Oh right, because accepting one’s self or one’s child’s same-sex attraction doesn’t require irreversible medical treatment, it simply requires an open mind, kindness, and love.
What makes trans so different from the rest of the LGB is that it requires something more than simple acceptance of self, it requires alteration of body and mind. Puberty blockers do more than delay gonadal development, but can prevent it altogether, cross-sex hormones cause sterilization and chemical castration, as well as change the brain and body, and surgery is about as invasive a thing as can be done to a healthy body.
Despite the persistent insistence by trans advocates that medical transition makes everything better for young people who come out as trans, there’s every reason to believe that this is not true.
There’s Charlie Evans and her Detransition Advocacy Network.
There’s the Pique Resilience Project, a group of young women who are speaking out against the cult of transitioning.
In an interview with the Pique Resilience Project, Helena, a member of the group, discusses how her transition began. “I went to an Informed Consent clinic. It’s a large national chain of medical health care clinics, and it was one appointment, it was one hour. On their website, they say that they do follow up appointments, for me that was not the case. And I told them that I was trans, I had dysphoria, they believed me, they didn’t ask any more questions, and I got my testosterone.”
Helena met with a therapist for just one hour before she was given a prescription for life-altering drugs. And after she began taking them, there was no therapeutic follow-up.
There’s Julia Beck and the Women’s Liberation Radio News.
And they’ve been here for a while. Katie Herzog wrote about detransitioners in 2017, and took a lot of abuse for it. So did Jesse Singal, who was threatened by his peers. Those that speak out against the medical transition of minors get ridiculed. But there is no other condition in which the healthy body of a juvenile person is drastically changed to match their mental idea of themselves.
Trans advocates would do their cause a service by admitting that not everyone who comes out as trans should go through with the entire transition process. What are trans advocates afraid of in making sure that everyone who undergoes transition wants to be there? How easily do they really feel kids should be able to access drugs and surgeries?
Should parents have no recourse but to assume that their child is fully aware of all of the risks of medically transitioning? Why do trans advocates want to limit the information kids and parents receive about the realities of medical transition? Why has the concept of “watchful waiting,” wherein parents allow a social but not medical transition, been scuttled? Why do grown-up trans advocates need to use children to justify their own existence?
Linehan has been vocal in the gender-critical space for some time, and he’s been willing to take the heat for it. In working with O’Malley to put together parent resources for therapists who are willing to meet with trans-identified kids for more than one hour before giving them a script for hormones, he is doing more for the trans cause than all the fast affirming therapists out there. Trans advocates should take a cue from Linehan. They should be on board with making sure than trans-identified kids are truly interested in living as the opposite sex, and less interested in pushing them all along the same path just to justify their own choices.
On February 1, feminist group Women’s Liberation Front held a panel discussion at the Seattle Public Library on the impact of transgender activism on women’s sex-based rights. Featuring Sabina Malik, Kara Dansky, and Twitter-banned Meghan Murphy, the sold-out talk was met with resounding support, but trans rights activists and antifa made their resentment and hostility clear.
Masked protestors wielding signs and chanting misogynistic slurs were monitored closely by Seattle police, who were out in full force to detail the crowd outside of the library.
As the night continued, the protests grew louder. Protestors began to use drums, whistles, and amplifiers in an attempt to disrupt the peaceful women’s rights-related talk occurring inside.
Several of the protestors managed to breach the security barriers and were shouted down by the crowd while police took action and removed them from the premises.
The Seattle Public Library event represents a disturbing trend in peaceful talks being shouted down by social justice mobs. In November of 2019, #GIDYVR had to relocate to the Pan Pacific after its Simon Fraser University sponsor, Mark Collard, withdrew access to the venue due to the overwhelming threat of violence.
In January 2020, Andy Ngo’s lecture at the University of British Columbia was cancelled citing similar concerns about campus safety.
All photos property of Amy Eileen Hamm (@preta_6) and used with consent.